主导眼评估及主导眼与非主导眼调节功能的比较  

Assessment of dominant eye and accommodation comparison between dominant and non-dominant eye

作　　者：王景慧[1] 高祥璐[1] 杨丽霞[2] 邢秀丽[1] 崔鹏云[1] 曹瀚坤 

机构地区：[1]天津医科大学眼视光学院,天津300070 [2]石家庄医学高等专科学校,石家庄050599

出　　处：《天津医科大学学报》2017年第3期266-269,共4页Journal of Tianjin Medical University

摘　　要：目的:分别测量注视性、运动性和知觉性主导眼,分析不同测量方法结果的一致性;测量主导眼与非主导眼调节功能,分析主导眼与非主导眼调节功能的差异。方法:对80位近视眼志愿者,完全矫正后分别利用卡洞法测量注视性主导眼、用集合近点法测量运动性主导眼、附加镜片法测量知觉性主导眼。测量单眼调节幅度、调节滞后量及调节灵敏度。结果:注视性与运动性、注视性与知觉性、运动性与知觉性主导眼结果一致性分别为k=0.48、k=0.32、k=0.37;双眼屈光差异越大,注视性与运动性主导眼测量结果一致性越低(r=0.732,P<0.05)。运动性主导眼与非主导眼的调节滞后量具有显著差异(P<0.01),调节灵敏度差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:临床工作中应全面评估主导眼;运动性主导眼具有更小的调节滞后量和更差的调节灵敏度。Objective： To measure the dominant eye using three different methods and analyze the consistency among them. To compare the accommodative amplitude（AA）, accommodative facility（AF）, and accommodative lag（AL）between dominant and non-dominant eyes.Methods： Eighty volunteers were enrolled in this study. Hole-in-the-card test, convergence near-point test add lens test were used to determine dominant eye with corrected vision. The AA, AF, AL were measured in the dominant and non-dominant eyes, respectively.Results： Sighting dominant eye and motor dominant eye, sighting dominant eye and sensory dominant eye, motor dominant eye and sensory dominant eye had moderate consistency（ k=0.48,k=0.32,k=0.37）.The higher the anisometropia,the poorer consistency between sighting dominant eye and motor dominant eye（r=0.732,P 〈0.05）. There was a significant difference in accommodative lag between motor dominant and non-dominant eye（P 〈0.01）and there was also a significant difference in accommodative lag between motor dominant and non-dominant eye（P 〈0.05）. Conclusion： It should be comprehensively evaluated： the dominant eye may have less accommodative lag and worse accommodative facility than the non-dominant eye.

关 键 词：主导眼 调节幅度 调节滞后 调节灵敏度 

分 类 号：R77[医药卫生—眼科]